Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Baida Finance still lists RCC Holdings as a strategic partner on it's website:
http://www.baida-finance.com/english/hzhb.asp
great post from the RCCH board:
this was in response to the shorts that claim mm's don't carry inventory of OTC/OTCBB stocks, when in fact, they most certainly do carry inventory, and when they run out, they naked short, just ask NITE how it's done! (check their recent filings)
Posted by: ghcnj Date: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 1:26:34 AM
In reply to: frogdreaming who wrote msg# 77599 Post # of 80384
I am fully aware of how the market works. It seems negative speculators are at differnt points of the spectrum when posting about RCCH and how the market works. Just keeping it real.
The process of purchasing over-the-counter (OTC) stocks is different than purchasing stock from companies on the NYSE and the NASDAQ. The major difference is that OTC securities are unlisted, so there is no central exchange for the market. All orders of OTC securities must be made through market makers who, instead of just matching orders, actually carry an inventory of securities to facilitate trading.
The first step an investor must make before they can trade in OTC securities is to open an account with a brokerage firm. An investor can choose from either a discount broker or a full-service broker to invest. However, investors should be aware that not all brokers allow trading in OTC securities. An investor's broker will work with the applicable market maker to ensure that the transaction process is completed successfully.
Here is an example of the steps that are taken when an investor makes a market buy order for an OTC stock. After the investor places the market order with his or her broker, the broker must now contact the security's respective market maker. The market maker then will quote the broker the ask price that the market maker is willing to sell the security at. Bid and ask quotes can be monitored constantly by an investor through the Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB).
Since the order was a market order the broker must accept the price quoted. The broker, then, will transfer the necessary funds to the market maker's account and is subsequently credited with the respective securities. If the investor wishes to do so they can place limit or stop orders for OTC securities in order to implement price limits. A similar process is carried out when an investor decides to sell an OTC security.
Although investing in OTC securities seems very simple, they are riskier than stocks listed on exchanges. OTC stocks are often from companies that are extremely small, with markets caps around $50 million or smaller. These companies offer very little information, which may be difficult to find, and they are extremely illiquid which can make it hard to find a buyer.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44953935
hey mm107~
my pleasure, hope it helps....
Been watching this for awhile, nice product, and I like the military applications, just a matter of time with this one imo.
maybe it timed out....
anyways go to:
http://www.finra.org/ and go to the "complaint" link uder the Investors" tab....
sorry about that~
here ya go moneynmetals~
https://forms.finra.org/Public/LoadForm.aspx?FormQuery=INVCMPLN.1&InstanceID=a2690f03-57bd-404d-a344-33a4b5de72b8&ReturnPage=&TimeStamp=2_27_16_4_56_447
Use it for any stock that you feel has been 'manipulated, like AFPW has been.
excellent article, "a must read" imo~
unfortunately, 6 more months of winter~
There is no reason to delay implementation of this, now this gives the market crooks plenty of time to take advantage of the 'sell in May and go away' that routinely happens.
Doesn't matter which party is in charge, the SEC is still a toothless tiger, and they have yet to address the DTCC, which is the real problem with the US markets, imo~
But, it's a start, at least it will happen in 6 months.....
It should apply to all equites.....
as even the OTC/OTCBB falls under Nasdaq regulation~
Furthermore, I do not see any exceptions at this time.
excellent, it's a start in the right direction~
check this out, long but worth the read imo~
http://www.counterfeitingstock.com/CS2.0/CounterfeitingStock.html
right back at ya,lol~
if they pass these changes talked about, then they need to concentrate on changing either the 1933 or 1934 Exchange Act (I can't remember which year it was) that says essentially no clearing agency has to participate in any market "disruption" such as what happens when a buy-in happens, this is the crux of the problem with the US markets and the DTCC has exploited this "loophole" since their inception in 1973......
Some of us have contacted the Senate Finance Committee to look into this, so far no luck in getting that law repealed.......yet~
The issue has been squarely placed on their table though.
good morning
and thanks for the replies, here's a link and the article below to the SEC vote from a few minutes ago, meeting starts at 10:00 EST.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Ahead-of-the-BellSEC-poised-apf-4172165911.html?x=0
.Ahead of the Bell:SEC poised to curb short-selling
SEC poised to adopt curbs on short-selling after long study; bid to prevent market turmoil
Wednesday February 24, 2010, 7:40 am
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal regulators are poised to rein in the practice of short-selling, restoring Depression-era restraints, in a bid to prevent stock-selling sprees that feed on themselves and can heighten market turmoil.
The Securities and Exchange Commission is scheduled to vote Wednesday at a public meeting to adopt new rules, following months of consideration by the commissioners. The SEC asked for public comment last April on several alternative approaches to restraining short-selling, and a bipartisan group of senators have been pushing the agency to act or face legislation.
The meeting begins at 10:00 a.m. EST.
The commissioners are expected to adopt a so-called circuit breaker for stock prices, restricting short-selling of an extremely fast-dropping stock for the rest of a trading session based on its highest bid.
Short-sellers bet against a stock, in a practice that is legal and widely used on Wall Street. They generally borrow a company's shares, sell them, and then buy them when the stock falls and return them to the lender -- pocketing the difference in price.
In July 2007, when the stock market was near its peak, the SEC abolished a 70-year-old uptick rule, put in during the Depression that followed the 1929 market crash that allowed short-sellers to come in only at a price above the highest current bid for the stock. Investor confidence was shaken as the market plunged in the fall of 2008 and proponents of restoring restraints said they were needed to prevent abusive trading. They maintained that the absence of the rule fanned market volatility, prompting bands of hedge funds and other aggressive investors to target weak companies with an avalanche of short-selling.
But opponents said new restrictions could eliminate the benefits of short-selling -- bringing capital into the markets and accurate stock prices to the surface -- and actually hurt investor confidence.
Last July, the SEC made permanent an emergency rule enacted at the height of the fall 2008 tumult that targets so-called "naked" short-selling -- when sellers don't even borrow the shares before selling them, and look to cover positions after the sale.
The SEC rule includes a requirement that brokers must promptly buy or borrow securities to deliver on a short sale.
Brokers acting for short-sellers must find a party believed to be able to deliver the shares within three days after the short-sale trade. If the shares aren't delivered within that time, there is deemed to be a "failure to deliver." Brokers can be subject to penalties if the failure to deliver isn't resolved by the start of trading on the following day.
hello all~
one fine board you got here imo.
Looking forward to the SEC vote tomorrow, and I might add they ought to require a "hard locate" on all shorting, if Broker A calls Broker B to borrow shares of "XYZ" company, and no shares available, then no locate is made so no short sale could be placed, simple, yet very effective. Then Broker A would have to call other brokers for the shares, if none available anywhere, again, no short sale.
This would help stop the abusive naked short selling so rampant in the OTC/OTCBB.
Cross reference this with the Outstanding share count known and if NITE and/or any MM or broker is shorting the 30-70% daily they are known for, then enforce a Buy-In via Rule 203(b) on a daily basis and while we are at it, break up the monopoly that is the DTCC, the only clearing agency here in the US, where all of the records of those naked short trades reside behind closed books, lets open them up for all to see and if there's a 'discrepancy' (*ahem*) between the nobo/obo lists and the OS and the DTC list, lets enofrce the Rules already on the books (that 203 thing, lol)
Maybe I'm asking too much, but what the hey!
all of my questions have been
answered to my satisfaction a long time ago with respect to RCCH. Sometimes things take a lot longer than planned and that is what I believe has happened here.
No need for me to explain or share anymore on a message board, everyone needs to do there own DD and make up their own minds.
good question.....
there's been some very good success's lately with companies going after posters who defame another individual or company, and it looks like RCCH is pursuing the same type of action.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but publically defaming another on a public message board is still illegal as far as I know.
There's a contact form on the company website:
www.rccholdings.com
You should inquire there.
I like it too ghcnj~
Looks like the delay has been caused by some outside entities and now the company is taking action against those very individuals/entities.
Can't wait to see them name names, lol!
news, website update:
Wednesday, 17 February 2010
RCC Aggressively Seeks Damages
RCC has completed its review of potential legal candidates and has chosen a firm to aggressively investigate and seek damages for any and all improper actions against the company, including but not limited to defamation, improper interference with business relations and manipulation of its stock price. RCC will be seeking maximum penalties for the harm they have done.
www.rccholdings.com
"actions today"
very nice, the way I see it Megas has 10 days to answer this latest mini speed bump and then he'd have 120 days to get caught up in filings.
Plenty of time~
Isn't that new clearing agency opening up this month lol?!?!
He'd need filings up to date for that, then we're off to the Nasdaq, and shorty won't have the luxury of revocation to hide their gains, and then those gains turn into really big losses, finally, just the way it goes, business is business.
The shorts (all 11 billion+- of them) were delighted at the thought or chance of this being revoked, as long as Megas answers this then no problem and shorty is still on the hook, big time.
Sounds like he already answered............."actions today"
imo~
according to my broker it is~
"HTB" after the ticker for IBIE.
read the filing excerpt carefully,
and the answer to your other questions have been answered so many times I don't feel the need or desire to repeat myself, so you need to ask the DTCC/SEC/brokers/mm's that shorted BCIT and/or didn't enforce the laws already on the books.
Pay particular attention to the words "capital requirements, statutory, and contractual restrictions", simply, no cash divi is possible at this point,
1) because there is no capital available to meet the need and
2) statute prohibits it, in other words, it's illegal at this point because certain legal conditions haven't been met. Even Megas said a non income producing shell cannot pay a cash divi, the SEC/FINRA just wouldn't allow it, period.
Furthermore, the shareholders cannot do an 'end around' of Megas, he's still the controlling shareholder, so his word goes, period.
I, for one, as well as others will await his decision as to what he does with his company and the stock issues it has.
This ploy you are hoping to pull off has never ever been done, by the guys owns words who first wrote it up in 2006, the SEC wouldn't even make a comment about it, so there is no legal precedent for it to be done, that alone is enough to keep an intelligent man like Megas from ever jeopardizing the money he's already spent trying to get clearance for his company's stock over the last 4 years, so I'll put my money on him not trying a whacked out solution that could end up with him in jail and out of all the money he's spent.
If this hair brained solution was tried, the SEC would just revoke the company's registration and the stock would never trade, and I for one do not want that, nor would any shareholder for that matter. Rolling the dice on this solution would kill any chances of BCIT ever trading again.
If you can provide one, just one example of a company that has done it, please provide it, I won't be holding my breath.....
Theory's are fine in Geometry Class, but have no place in the reality of the marketplace and today's regulatory environment.
End of discussion, no cash divi possible and Megas certainly hasn't authorized one, he knows all the other much more important issues have to be resolved first. If someday the shell got cleaned up and a business was merged in and was profitable, then, as the filings point out, a cash divi could be considered by the Board of Directors, then and only then, and it would be up to their discretion to go forward to issue one.
Enough said~
from a previous 10k:
I see no amended changes to this policy, so it is still in effect, according to the filings........
Dividend Policy
Dividend
As of December 31, 2007, there were 76 record owners of our common stock. This number excludes approximately 1,500 persons or entities we have identified as holding Invalid Certificates. See “Legal Proceedings.”
As
We have never declared or paid dividends on our common stock. We intend to follow a policy of retaining earnings, if any, to finance the growth of the business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The declaration and payment of future dividends on the common stock will be the sole discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on the our profitability and financial condition, capital requirements, statutory and contractual restrictions, future prospects and other factors deemed relevant.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1076779/000114420408020290/v108815_10ksb.htm
hurley,
I will be backing my BCIT short numbers up in an upcoming post,
based on trade figures and borker figures, lol~
Stay tuned :)
And contrary to what that poster claims, BCIT's TA is Empire, have spoken with them in the past.
RIP woog/clarity/plystk,
and thanks for a lot of your DD, some if it was very helpful.
Best wishes to his family and friends~
mainuh
yes that is right,
20 trading days which works out to about 30 days total with the weekends thrown in.
After that the rest of the mm's can 'piggyback' onto the 15c-211 that was filed by VFIN~
I think this particular mm is showing the .02 bid in case somebody wanted to help him fill his inventory, I also don't see a published ask, so he must not have any inventory to sell, yet.
The last time I saw a stock with this low Outstanding share count open up with one mm the b/a was .01 x 2000$, and the first trades went off at .10 then went .15, and the bid was still showing at .01, so it didn't really mean much, imo~
legalegaltx,
imo, whenever TM got the filings up to date before the DTC/DTCC has always denied him clearing services, and this might be why he hasn't brought the latest ones up to date, he wants a guarantee of clearing, from his email awhile back it looks as though he is waiting for the new Nasdaq OMX Group to open up in Q4 and he could get clearing then, imo.
At that point with this delisting reprieve, the stock could trade if he got current with the filings, and we'd all be happier~
yw Joda,
just trying to stay on track here with BCIT.
It has been a long road with a lot twists, so it's easy to get sidetracked.
We only want what is legal for us and the company, not something that will delay trading any further.
All we want is the laws already on the books enforced~
No sense in breaking any laws at this point now is there?
(rhetorical question, lol)
see my previous post for a reality check,
and if the shoe fits...........
I'm not anti divi at all, the fact of the matter is it cannot be done legally at this point as I said. As I recall, another poster and I first brought up the cash divi scenario on RB as a "what if" thing Megas 'could' do at some point way back in '05.
It was just one of several possibilities we discussed at length. They were just discussions though, yet some have latched onto the idea like it is possible when it isn't at this time.
The SEC wouldn't allow it, nor would FINRA.
I don't care what this 'Tom V' character says, one only has to follow the law for the correct answer, simple.
no divi can be issued at this point....
for BCIT.
Those that think otherwise have no understanding of how such an instrument can be used.
First and foremost, the company would have to have the necessary cash set aside in a special account (escrowed), and that money would have to be derived from actual contracts or other services. You cannot just add money to a corporation and then issue a cash divi.
The last filings show zero profit so there is no cash available, period, therefore no cash divi is possible in any legal sense.
There would have to be an amount of cash equal to the payout based on 525 million current Outstanding.
No where is that amount of cash at BCIT's disposal.
Those saying a cash divi would force trading are connecting two dots on separate pieces of paper, to put it mildly.
One action cannot force the other, and in fact would stymie all hopes of trading at this point, as a short squeeze cannot be manufactured and that's just what would be happening.
Of course, covering of oversold shorted shares in the normal course of trading is completely legal, and is the ultimate goal here imo.
The stock needs clearing services and up to date filings, then the 203 could be issued and the mess would be cleaned up.
As I have commented before, since Mr. Megas is paying the bills he calls the shots, not peeps on a message board who want to spend his money like he has an endless supply, so we just need to see what he decides to do.
We got the delisting reprieve, now we wait for a legal resolution to this.
now that's what I've been waiting for.....
thanks~
And best of luck to all here!
ditch72,
here's an idea, why don't we just let Mr. Megas and his lawyer decide what to do about all this?!?!
Afterall, Mr. Megas is the guy paying for it all, always has been footing the bill.
Funny how some newbie shows up telling us what we should do, so far Mr. Megas hasn't walked away so I'll stick with his plan, and I sure wouldn't be taking advice from some DTC/DTCC apologist, lol~
very nice~
no time limit you say?
Good news for BCIT.
Thx!
last I looked....
T+3 is still the law of the land, and that passed a long time ago with BCIT, sooooo, nobody can be forced to accept a refund of their original purchase, my broker and Mr. Megas have both said as much~
The shares we hold are ours, period. The only thing that can happen to them is split(s) or we sell them.
The time for refunds of our purchase price is just like the r/s, that issue is a dead duck.
If somebody wants to accept that offer from their broker then it is up to them, they cannot be forced to accept a refund though.
now that's more like it~
I checked that list earlier several times today and it was still on, looks like it has been removed!
Best news I've seen in awhile........
Thanks Generic~
f/s on the daily list~
13:34 8/3/2009 SUGM Sungro Minerals Inc. Common Stock SUGO Sungro Minerals Inc. New Common Stock 5-1 F/S, Payable upon surrender **
Looks like new symbol will be SUGO on Monday
lmao, "clawback"!
probably right under the "Grovel, Whimper and Moan" column
and kicks in when RCCH hits heights unknown!
there's been some lately
that have been trying awful hard to get us to sell and not buy, that .001 trade kind of quieted them down some, notice that, lol?!?!
Been here all along mm107,
doing A-OK, been buying daily just to make shorty happy, lol!
yup, 1 million @ .001~ eom
haha, looked real good
for 4 minutes!
Just the beginning, imo~